read() on relayfs channel returns premature 0

se of relayfs (there are the redux patches, which I have yet to try). Nonetheless I'd like to know whether this behaviour is deliberate. Is it? Thanks, -- Kingsley P.S. I've been able to get around this by deliberately modifying do_read() with the attached patch

Relayfs Question: Use of relay_reset(). Potential race?

n too. I understand, however, that flush_schedule_work() blocks and thus it probably shouldn't be used in certain areas of the relayfs code. My thanks, -- Kingsley - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL

Re: Relayfs Question: Use of relay_reset(). Potential race?

On Mon, Apr 18, 2005 at 10:56:57AM -0500, Tom Zanussi wrote: > Kingsley Cheung writes: > > On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 08:02:54PM +1100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Hi > > > > > > I'm using relayfs to relay data from a kernel module to user spac

[PATCH] relayfs crash

uly and it fixed the problem. Could we consider putting this patch into relayfs? Its similar to the one posted in July 2004, except it also moves clear_readers() before INIT_WORK in relay_release (is that acceptable?). Thanks, -- Kingsley --- linux-2.6.5-7.97ZP2/fs/relayfs/relay.

Re: [PATCH] relayfs crash

On Sun, Feb 06, 2005 at 10:42:27PM -0600, Tom Zanussi wrote: > Kingsley Cheung writes: > > > > To solve the problem I applied a patch similar to the one you posted > > back in July and it fixed the problem. Could we consider putting this > > patch into relayfs? It

Re: read() on relayfs channel returns premature 0

relayfs/patch-relayfs-2.6.10-050113 and ftp://oss.sgi.com/projects/pagg/download/linux-2.6.10-pagg.patch-4 read() gives me a zero still once about a page of data has been read. Many thanks, -- Kingsley RelayfsModule.tar.bz2 Description: BZip2 compressed data

Re: read() on relayfs channel returns premature 0

On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 01:11:39PM -0600, Tom Zanussi wrote: > Kingsley Cheung writes: > > On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 09:29:12AM -0600, Tom Zanussi wrote: > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > > > > > > Now I understand that this is not the latest r